Amazing the negative comments for a car almost no one has test driven given it's only just available at dealers. VW has already stated it will not be a mainstream model given the price and where a good deal of the market is right now. And....it's NOT another CUV!

"That same strategy failed to earn either the Phaeton or the CC a sizable audience here in the United States, and Volkswagen's expectations are tempered accordingly. Kai Oltmanns, the car's project manager, told us that although under-the-radar premium vehicles like the Arteon are quite desirable in Europe, "We don't see it as a big volume seller in the U.S.""

If Mazda ever offers the 2.5T Mazda6 with AWD in Signature trim (toward the end of 2019?), it will be better looking, better driving, more reliable, and less expensive than the Arteon. And no one will care.

I smell bovine excrement. You are talking about how it will better driving and less expensive when the model is not even available. How do you know? Have you even driven a VW product?

Yes, I owned a VW product. I now own a Mazda product. In terms of driving dynamics, there's no comparison; the Mazda is much better. The interior is a wash; I like VW's interiors. In terms of MSRP, the Mazda6 in Signature trim is ~$36k. The cost of adding AWD is unknown, but let's just round way up to $40k. Per this article, the Arteon SEL Premium model starts at $45,940. Crunching the numbers -- beep boop beep boop boop -- yep, it looks like an AWD Mazda6 Signature would be considerably less expensive. I'm speculating, and looks are subjective, but my opinion is not baseless. And as for people not caring, I'm pretty sure that's correct.

Yes, I owned a VW product. I now own a Mazda product. In terms of driving dynamics, there's no comparison; the Mazda is much better. The interior is a wash; I like VW's interiors. In terms of MSRP, the Mazda6 in Signature trim is ~$36k. The cost of adding AWD is unknown, but let's just round way up to $40k. Per this article, the Arteon SEL Premium model starts at $45,940. Crunching the numbers -- beep boop beep boop boop -- yep, it looks like an AWD Mazda6 Signature would be considerably less expensive. I'm speculating, and looks are subjective, but my opinion is not baseless. And as for people not caring, I'm pretty sure that's correct.

The thing about VW interiors is that they are clean and hence 10 years from now, it will still look clean and handsome. Japanese interiors (Mazda is an exception) look busy and contrived.

As a former owner of a NC MX-5 and 626, I am not a big fan of their engines. The VW EA888 is phenomenal in terms of smoothness and it's reliable (it's been around for a good decade now). It's heads and shoulders over the NA 4-bangers that they use in the Golf and Jetta. I personally like the highway stability of VW products. Most Japanese cars aren't great in that area.

The 2.5T will need 93 octane gas to make it's full 250hp while the VW can get away with 91 octane.

Mazda 6 may have the slight edge in pricing but here in Canada, the Arteon starts at $48K (about $36K US) while the Mazd6 Signature (no AWD) starts at $42K (about $31K US).

The thing about VW interiors is that they are clean and hence 10 years from now, it will still look clean and handsome. Japanese interiors (Mazda is an exception) look busy and contrived.

As a former owner of a NC MX-5 and 626, I am not a big fan of their engines. The VW EA888 is phenomenal in terms of smoothness and it's reliable (it's been around for a good decade now). It's heads and shoulders over the NA 4-bangers that they use in the Golf and Jetta. I personally like the highway stability of VW products. Most Japanese cars aren't great in that area.

The 2.5T will need 93 octane gas to make it's full 250hp while the VW can get away with 91 octane.

Mazda 6 may have the slight edge in pricing but here in Canada, the Arteon starts at $48K (about $36K US) while the Mazd6 Signature (no AWD) starts at $42K (about $31K US).

Did the 626 have a Ford-derived engine? I think that, for a time, it shared a platform with the Probe. You are certainly correct about stability at highway speeds. My VW tracked beautifully at 85-90 mph. There is some German voodoo engineered into the VW suspensions, even on short-wheelbase models. The Mazda is lighter and louder, although they've made significant NVH improvements to the latest model. The 2.5T has 100% of its torque regardless of octane, and every review I've watched/read suggests that people won't miss the ~25 hp unless they're driving at the limits. In my opinion, you are also correct about the relative cleanliness/timelessness of VW interiors. Nevertheless, neither car will sell well in the U.S.

Did the 626 have a Ford-derived engine? I think that, for a time, it shared a platform with the Probe. You are certainly correct about stability at highway speeds. My VW tracked beautifully at 85-90 mph. There is some German voodoo engineered into the VW suspensions, even on short-wheelbase models. The Mazda is lighter and louder, although they've made significant NVH improvements to the latest model. The 2.5T has 100% of its torque regardless of octane, and every review I've watched/read suggests that people won't miss the ~25 hp unless they're driving at the limits. In my opinion, you are also correct about the relative cleanliness/timelessness of VW interiors. Nevertheless, neither car will sell well in the U.S.

My 626 had a 2.2L 3-valve unit. That was the model before the Probe sharing. Mazda 323 and 626 were sold as Ford Laser and Telstar starting 1982. The 115hp 2L that came in the 1993 626 nad Probe was really under-powered. Mazda in the 80's had weak piston rings, so they smoked a lot.

Most consumers these days don't care for the bigger engine version, despite offering similar highway mpg numbers and having a greater safety margin overtaking on 2-lane roads. The reason Subaru cancelled the Legacy GT was lack of sales.

I personally looked at the Arteon but settled on an A4. They knocked $4,500 off the list price, 0% 60 months financing and I had a set of 18" Audi rims left over from my '17 A4. VW has a different wheel offset and I didn't want to spend another $1000 to get winter rims. Audi uses passive TPMS, so I can do my own winter tire swaps (savings of another $800-1000 over the 4-5 years of ownership) while VW uses the sensors. Accountant, so I do look at these things.

If you really want an AWD with a turbo 4, look at the 2020 Legacy with the 2.4T. Off all the CVT cars that I have driven, Subaru's CVT feels the most automatic like (Audi was buying from the same supplier for the US FWD models). Subaru, starting with their Ascent, has really upped their NVH and interior quality.

It has no chance of selling well here, even if it is nice to look at. Practical people will buy a 2.0T Accord or something similar since those offer just as much equipment for much less money. People that might want the exclusivity will buy an Audi for the brand name. When these languish on dealer lots and end up heavily discounted, then it might be worth considering as something different from mainstream midsize cars.

I am FAR from a Tesla cult member (check my post history) but seriously, why would anyone buy this over a Model 3? The Arteon appears to have a slightly superior interior, but it gets demolished in pretty much every aspect of performance, whether you are referring to acceleration, handling, or fuel economy. I am currently shopping for a new vehicle, but I am not shopping this segment so don't confuse me with someone trying to justify their purchase, but between the two, at similar price points, the Arteon doesn't make sense (to me).

I'd rather have this than a Model 3. For one thing, an EV is a non-starter for me. Not practical for my situation. But even if it was, I don't like the Model 3's interior. Just a few buttons on the steering wheel, and everything else is controlled on the screen. Not a huge fan of that setup. Also, the Arteon's bigger, and with the sportback, has a lot more cargo space. And the Arteon can actually be bought for under $40K, as this SE AWD test model shows. I think most Model 3's actually run a lot more than that.

The company will still be around in 3 years, you aren't nickeled and dimed for features like paint, the interior is properly assembled and made of materials befitting the price, the windows wont blow out in the heat, and the bumper covers won't fall off in the rain.

I'd rather have this than a Model 3. For one thing, an EV is a non-starter for me. Not practical for my situation. But even if it was, I don't like the Model 3's interior. Just a few buttons on the steering wheel, and everything else is controlled on the screen. Not a huge fan of that setup. Also, the Arteon's bigger, and with the sportback, has a lot more cargo space. And the Arteon can actually be bought for under $40K, as this SE AWD test model shows. I think most Model 3's actually run a lot more than that.

Thats a good point, the Arteon does appear to be superior for vacuum salesmen.

Gorgeous sedan. The Japanese could never do a well developed form this clean and well detailed. Apparently, neither could BMW.
The interior seems a bit bland, but it's hard to judge interiors from photos.
I wonder how the AWD works? No explanation, as usual.

I loved the looks when I first saw the pictures. Now that I've seen a few in real life I'm not as enamored. It's a little too rounded and to be honest kind of flabby. I think the original CC looked great, but this Arteon reminds me too much of the more bloated second generation CC.

There was no second generation CC. There was a refresh of the first generation, where it got a new grill, headlights and redesigned tail lights and bumper. But it had exactly the same body (greenhouse, doors, fenders), so I cannot understand how it could be seen as more bloated. It was a great looking car, but it was old and way overdue for a full revamp.